The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Advocacy Coalition Framework Approach to Stakeholder Analysis: Understanding the Political Context of California Marine Protected Area Policy
Abstract
There is a growing recognition that public policy controversies are driven more by value differences than by technical deficiencies. Unfortunately, we have yet to develop, test, and refine systematic approaches for understanding political systems. In this article I explain how the advocacy coalition framework (ACF) can be used as a theoretical basis for understanding political context via a stakeholder analysis. An ACF stakeholder analysis widens the attention of policy analysts toward subsystem-wide dynamics with multiple actors who are motivated by their beliefs, structure their relationships into advocacy coalitions, and try to influence policy through utilizing multiple resources and venues. I illustrate an ACF approach to stakeholder analysis in a scientifically contentious political conflict over the establishment of marine protected areas in California. I conclude with a summary of contributions to the ACF literature and the strengths and limitations of conducting an ACF stakeholder analysis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action
Field, B. C., & Ostrom, E. (1992) · Land Economics · doi:10.2307/3146384 · Cited by 18,859
Agendas and instability in American politics
(1993) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.31-0574 · Cited by 5,981
Introduction to Social Network Methods
Hanneman, R. A. (2001) · Cited by 3,889
Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach
Roberts, A., Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1994) · Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques · doi:10.2307/3551961 · Cited by 3,628
Theories of the Policy Process
Sabatier, P. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780367274689 · Cited by 3,490
Dowdall, G. W., Singleton, R., Straits, B. C., Straits, M. N., & McAllister, R. J. (1989) · Teaching Sociology · doi:10.2307/1317936 · Cited by 2,821
Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science
Simon, H. A. (1985) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1956650 · Cited by 1,359
The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change
Bennett, C. J., & Howlett, M. (1992) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf00138786 · Cited by 1,346
Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms
Fiorino, D. J. (1990) · Science, Technology, & Human Values · doi:10.1177/016224399001500204 · Cited by 1,320
The Comparative Study Of Political Elites
Putnam, & Robert, R. (1976) · Cited by 1,081
Cited by
Expert‐Based Information and Policy Subsystems: A Review and Synthesis
Weible, C. M. (2008) · Policy Studies Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00287.x · Cited by 470
Self-citationNetwork Structures within Policy Processes: Coalitions, Power, and Brokerage in Swiss Climate Policy
Ingold, K. (2011) · Policy Studies Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00416.x · Cited by 361
A Quarter Century of the Advocacy Coalition Framework: An Introduction to the Special Issue
Weible, C. M., Sabatier, P. A., Jenkins‐Smith, H. C., Nohrstedt, D., Henry, A. D., & deLeon, P. (2011) · Policy Studies Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00412.x · Cited by 355
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Weible, C. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-03-08
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 95-117
- ISSN
- 1053-1858 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9803
- OpenAlex
- W1966958715
- Cited by
- 347
- References
- 46
- FWCI
- 36.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Advocacy Coalition Framework Approach to Stakeholder Analysis: Understanding the Political Context of California Marine Protected Area Policy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jopart/muj015
- The paper
- Weible, C. M. (2006). An Advocacy Coalition Framework Approach to Stakeholder Analysis: Understanding the Political Context of California Marine Protected Area Policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muj015
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.